UNIT 13 PEACEBUILDING – MEANING AND SIGNIFICANCE

Structure
13.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
13.2 Terminological Distinctions
13.3 Normative and Evolutionary framework
13.4 Multiple Actors and Domains
13.5 Principal Challenges
13.6 Summary
13.7 Terminal Questions
Suggested Readings

13.1 INTRODUCTION

In the past two decades, peacebuilding has emerged as one of the pathways advocated and
attempted by both the governments and nongovernment actors for assisting societies in the
process of recovering from the effects of violent conflicts so as to avoid return to violence.
As a notion, peacebuilding has become a symbol of shared sovereignty between local
population and international community. It can also be considered as a successor to the
concept of international trusteeship which was invoked to administer dependent peoples and
territories after the Second World War. Whereas the trusteeship was in the twentieth century,
peacebuilding can be seen as a product of globalisation and global governance aimed to
influence and shape domestic governance institutions.

While the term peacebuilding may have been of recent origin, the practice of outside
countries assisting war-ravaged societies in reconstruction was evident in the twentieth
century history. The United States, for example, took lead in helping the reconstruction of
Europe and Japan after the Second World War. Since the end of the Cold War, Afghanistan,
Cambodia, El Salvador, Sierra Leone and many other countries attracted attention in the
context of post-war peacebuilding strategies at work. Ironically however, there exists a good
deal of confusion about what peacebuilding aims at, its nature and scope as also the
challenges it is faced with. The questions that are pertinent here are the following: How
different is peacebuilding from peacemaking or preventive diplomacy? Would it be true to
say that peacebuilding stands by the strategic interests and ideological preferences of the
external sponsors of peacebuilding rather than the aspirations of the local communities?

Aims and Objectives

This Unit would enable you to

· Trace the variegated meanings attributed to the term “peacebuilding” by scholars,

governments, international agencies and the non-governmental organisations;

· Discuss the main features and characteristics associated with peacebuilding;

· Explain the nature of peacebuilding in terms of its normative underpinnings and its
evolutionary dynamics;
 · Appreciate its complex aspects with reference to both the internal and external
stakeholders and the multiple levels of engagement to make peacebuilding effective;
and

· Assess the standards applied to evaluate the reasons for the mixed track record of
peacebuilding efforts so far.

13.2 TERMINOLOGICAL DISTINCTIONS

Although peacebuilding is broadly understood as foreign intervention that aims to prevent

return of armed conflict in a war-torn country, there are notable differences about the
meaning and scope of peacebuilding and the manner of promoting it. Some analysts would
like to qualify the acts of external intervention by emphasizing the non-military nature of the
external interventions. Tschirgi (2004, p.2), for instance, sums up peacebuilding as “non-
military interventions by external actors to help war-torn societies not only to avoid a relapse
into conflict, but more importantly, to establish conditions for sustainable peace.” The short-
term need to avoid becomes pressing in view of the finding by researchers that 44 percent
risk exists of a country reaching the end of a conflict to return to conflict within five years.
At the same time, the long-term objective of creating conditions for making peace durable is
not to be de-linked from the immediate objective. The understanding offered by the policy
practitioners also touches upon both these nuances. Boutros-Ghali was among the first to
delineate on the term soon after assuming the post of the UN Secretary-General. According
to him, peacebuilding denotes “action to identify and support structure which will tend to
strengthen and solidify peace in order to avoid relapse into conflict”.
According to scholars Michelle Maiese (2003), there are two distinct ways to understand
peacebuilding: as a particular phase in the long drawn process as contrasted from the
expansive and comprehensive concept. The work of the United Nations represents the
understanding about peacebuilding as a distinct phase in the long-drawn process of making
peace stable. According to the UN, peacebuilding occurs after violent conflict has slowed
down or come to a halt. Peacebuilding, in this sense, is contrasted from the more traditional
strategies of peacemaking and peacekeeping. Peacemaking is the diplomatic effort to end the
violence between the conflicting parties, move them towards nonviolent dialogue, and
eventually reach a peace agreement. Peacekeeping, on the other hand, is a third-party
intervention (often, but not always done by military forces) to assist parties in transitioning
from violent conflict to peace by separating the fighting parties and keeping them apart.
Peacekeeping not only provides security but also facilitates other non-military initiatives.
Thus, in the narrow perspective convenient to measurable policy initiatives, peacebuilding
facilitates the establishment of durable peace; it also tries to prevent the recurrence of
violence by addressing root causes and effects of conflict through reconciliation, institution
building, and political as well as economic transformation. This consists of a set of physical,
social, and structural initiatives that are often an integral part of post-conflict reconstruction
and rehabilitation. Many non-governmental organisations (NGOs), on the other hand,
understand peacebuilding as an umbrella concept that encompasses not only as long-term
transformative efforts, but also peacemaking and peacekeeping. In this view, peacebuilding
includes early warning and response efforts, violence prevention, advocacy work, civilian and
military peacekeeping, military intervention, humanitarian assistance, ceasefire agreements,
and the establishment of peace zones. The central task of peacebuilding is to create positive
peace, a “stable social equilibrium in which the surfacing of new disputes does not escalate
into violence and war” (Maiese, 2003).
The narrow conception need not lead us to the conclusion that peacebuilding has no linkage
with peacemaking or peacekeeping. Indeed, the UN believes that peacebuilding
complements the organisation’s peacemaking and peacekeeping functions, as sought to be
demonstrated in several post-conflict theatres like Sierra Leone and Haiti. The essential goal
of peacebuilding, as per the 1995 Supplement to an Agenda for Peace, is “the creation of
structures for the institutionalization of peace”. In other words, peacebuilding is conflict
prevention by another name and, therefore, “postconflict” often modifies peacebuilding to
distinguish it from conflict prevention (Barnett, 2007, p.42).

Other major players in peacebuilding like the World Bank and the International Monetary
Fund (IMF) strike remarkably a different note. Unlike the UN, the World Bank tends to
avoid the term “peacebuilding” and the alternative terms like post-conflict reconstruction and
post-conflict recovery are in use. In many respects, this preference represents adherence to
the original mandate of these agencies, as for instance the salience of reconstruction flowed
from the very name given to the Bank and the original mandate given to the Fund to jointly
contribute post-War recovery of the European allies. These two major financial organisations
continue to rely on the term post-conflict recovery in their joint declaration/statements.
In the usage of various donor governments and agencies too, peacebuilding has acquired
different names and nuances. Relevant agencies within the governments of the United States,
the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, France and Japan use different terms. The defence
departments in the UK and the US, for instance, often use the term stabilisation when they
refer to peacebuilding activities, reflecting their preoccupation with launching of security
missions (although NATO uses the term peacebuilding). At the same time, interestingly, the
US Agency for International Development (USAID) focuses on post-conflict recovery and on
prevention. In the UK, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for
International Development follow the US example, while claiming that peace-related
activities like peacebuilding fall within their respective mandates. Canada’s Department of
Foreign Affairs describes its post-conflict work as conflict prevention, but the Canadian
government prefers to use peacebuilding to describe its actions in support of peace operations
and economic development. Similarly, Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs uses the term
conflict prevention, and the Japan International Cooperation Agency, a lead donor to states
recovering from conflict, uses the term peacebuilding (Barnett, 2007, p.43).
Surely these are only differences in emphasis. What is beyond any doubt is the realisation
that the special needs of societies emerging from conflict were seen to require hybrid
approaches drawn from the flexible, rapid and responsive strategies of humanitarian
operations, and the long-term vision of development assistance. As Mark Malloch Brown
who has held a range of such important offices in the World Bank, the UNDP and the UN
(apart from being deputy foreign minister in Britain), says “post-conflict development is
something that defies the exact boundaries of traditional forms of assistance: it is neither
sustainable development nor is it humanitarian response” (quoted in Tschirgi, 2004, p.6).

13.3 NORMATIVE AND EVOLUTIONARY FRAMEWORK

Now, we should pay some attention to some of the normative aspects of peacebuilding.
Viewed from the “liberal internationalism” prism, peacebuilding goes beyond state-centric
conceptions of realpolitik or the interests of any single country, bloc or entity even though
national interests of countries inevitably often influence the nature of the international
response. It was argued that fundamental “re-engineering” of conflict prone societies was
essential to prevent their relapse into conflict. External actors began to develop a
peacebuilding template and a package of standard remedies to be applied in different
contexts. Security needed to be established through disarmament, demobilisation and
reintegration of former combatants as well as through security sector reform. Political
consolidation required national dialogues, early elections, expansion of political rights, and
the establishment of rule of law. Economic reconstruction involved reforms for speedy
recovery and rehabilitation. International strategies for conflict prevention and peacebuilding
increasingly converged, becoming part of what has come to be known as “liberal
internationalism” (Paris, 2004; Tschirgi, 2004, p.5).

No doubt, the popularity of peacebuilding is due to the strong interest among the external and
also domestic actors to help the war-ravaged states recoup from the multifarious effects. Just
as domestic actors look for international assistance in a variety of areas, international actors
look at peacebuilding as useful to their humanitarian and international peace and security
agenda. To ensure that these diverse actors join in a common effort, peacebuilding needs to
skirt divisions and differences over how to handle the post-conflict challenges. In this
respect, it becomes a political symbol so that different constituencies can support without
shared perceptions about the substance (Barnett, 2007, p. 44). Almost all agree that building
peace after war is a good thing but may entertain different explanations as to why it is a good
thing (i.e. because it alleviates human suffering, generates regional stability, or creates
conditions for long-term development efforts to take root). To illustrate the point, the Bush
administration in the US viewed peacebuilding as an opportunity to prop up market-friendly
democracies, while for the UNDP it was a step leading to not only economic development but
also strong presence of civil societies committed to a culture of nonviolent dispute resolution.
Peacebuilding helps these actors mask their divergent expectations and work in a loose
partnership (Barnett, 2007, p.44).
Another dynamic of peacebuilding is the piecemeal nature of the evolution of international
response without a single institutional home. In the first half of 1990s, the advanced
countries viewed peacebuilding as a temporary need; therefore, some among them like the
United States, Canada, and Netherlands designated specific units to attend to the institutional
and policy void between humanitarian assistance and development aid. The UNDP and the
World Bank took the cue and established respectively an Emergency Response Division and
Post-Conflict Unit in 1995-97. Afterwards, the OECD compiled “Guidelines on Conflict,
Peace and Development Cooperation” in 1997. Although this met the short-term goals of
these governments and organisations, it was clear by the end of 1990s that peacebuilding was
proving to be a complex and continuing task, needing action at the global level to provide
institutional coherence and policy coordination. In the opening years of the new century the
quest for founding an institutional home in order to fill the institutional void started. The
former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and the high level panel on threats to global
security piloted the idea of creating a special body within the United Nations. Those efforts
culminated in the creation of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) in 2005-06. Howsoever
valuable is the institution of the PBC, its work profile is modest confined to relatively minor
peacebuilding theatres in Burundi, Central African Republic and other countries in Africa.
Major efforts launched in Afghanistan and Iran in the first decade of the twenty-first century
have remained effectively outside the domain of the PBC.
A recent study usefully discusses three phases – particularly from the point of view of the
American policy engagement – international action towards post-conflict reconstruction. The
first phase concerned the US assistance to the allied countries in the immediate aftermath of
the World War II during 1946-56. It was entirely single handed show by the United States
given its economic and military pre-eminence those days. The second phase surfaced after a
lapse of four decades when the US-USSR Cold War was formally brought to an end in 1990.
The unsettling post-conflict situations after civil wars in Africa and Latin America (and Asia)
prompted UN-authorised interventions to restore and stabilise peace and state structures.
Some of them were part of the UN peace operations as in Angola, El Salvador, former
Yugoslavia, Haiti, Mozambique, Namibia, Somalia and so forth, with the support of the
United States both in symbolic and substantial terms. The third phase has begun after the
September 2001 terror attacks against the United States, the fall out of which was the
peacebuilding has come to be seen increasingly from national security interests. The
consequences of controversial military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq have paved the
way for major peacebuilding endeavours under the American watch (Orr cited in Tschirgi,
2004, p.18).
Finally, given the fact that peacebuilding by nature is a long drawn process, it is not easy to
evaluate its success. Mozambique, Namibia and El Salvador are cited among the more
fruitful exercises in peacebuilding in the early 1990s, whereas Angola, Kosovo and Western
Sahara represent relatively exhausting endeavours (Bertram, 1995). Researchers adopt a
minimalist standard, i.e. avoidance of a return to violence, whereas equally appealing would
be the maximalist method to evaluate peacebuilding based on evidence of structural
transformation of the economic, social and political factors that had led to war in the first
place (Tschirgi, 2004, p.11). Guided by the minimalist standard of evaluation, Roland Paris
(2004) examined eleven episodes of peacebuilding. And he observes: “In most of the eleven
cases, the process of political liberalization, or economic liberalization, or both, produced
destabilizing side effects that worked against the consolidation of peace. The approach to
peacebuilding that prevailed in the 1990s was, it seems, based on overtly optimistic
assumptions about the effects of democratization and marketization in the immediate
aftermath of civil war.” On the whole, the conclusions from these multi-country studies
demonstrate that peacebuilding has a mixed track record.

13.4 MULTIPLE ACTORS AND DOMAINS

Michelle Maisie (2003) brings out three levels at which peacebuilding could and should be
put at work. At the structural level, it should address the root causes, i.e. social conditions
that foster violent conflicts. That is to say, stable peace must be built on social, economic and
political foundations that serve the needs of the people. Establishment of democracy and rule
of law along with creation of conditions for economic development are integral to this
dimension. The next level relates to reducing the effects of war-related hostility through the
repair and transformation of damaged relationships. The relational dimension of
peacebuilding centres on reconciliation, forgiveness, trust building, and future imagining. It
seeks to minimise poorly functioning communication and maximise mutual understanding.
And finally, the personal dimension of peacebuilding centres on desired changes at the
individual level. If individuals are not able to undergo a process of healing, there will be
broader social, political, and economic repercussions. The destructive effects of social
conflict must be minimised, and its potential for personal growth must be maximised.
Corresponding to these three levels, peacebuilding strategies should integrate wide range of
agents: national and foreign authorities collaborating at the top, social and economic elite of
the society as also voluntary organisations working at the middle level, whereas individuals
and their groups or communities are drawn in at the bottom tier.
Significantly, peacebuilding activities are governed by a few operational principles. Foremost
to be noted is that peacebuilding is a multi-dimensional enterprise with several pillars that
include political, social, economic, security and legal dimensions. Although multi-faceted,
prioritisation or sequencing of steps becomes unavoidable in line with the specific needs and
political dynamics of a given country. In that sense, it is possible that peacebuilding
prioritises political (defined in terms of creation of legitimate political authority and
improvement of security) over economic pillars. Equally imperative is the multiple response
levels – at the local, national, regional and international levels. At the local level, for
instance, the people of the war-torn society must be actively involved in setting the agenda
and leading the process. However, given the frail situation in the native societies wanting to
emerge from war, support from external actors becomes undoubtedly helpful. It should be
acknowledged at the same time that external assistance is never neutral. External actors
come with multiple agendas and motivations which may not be compatible with the ground
situation. Hence proper mechanisms need to be established to ensure that external and
internal actors work with a coherent strategy, establish priorities and mobilise necessary
resources. Moreover, such mechanisms could institutionalise the principle of accountability
to ensure that external actors do no harm. And finally, adequate, predictable and flexible
funding is essential (Tschirgi, 2004, p.9).
To turn to the sectoral domains of peacebuilding, three tasks are critical according to former
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan (2001). They are furtherance of internal and external
security; facilitating revival or inception of political institutions and governance structures;
and fostering economic and social rehabilitation and transformation. Consolidating internal
and external security involves the deployment of peacekeepers and/or military observers to
ensure security or negotiate access to the affected people and then extending to initiating
other measures like mine clearance and capacity-building for mine action and also security
sector reform stretching from creation of a neutral police force broadly representative of the
community to the, disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration of armed groups. The
other functional sectors would have a bearing on strengthening political institutions and
promoting good governance. This would require the creation or strengthening of national
democratic institutions, political parties and other participatory mechanisms including the
media, capacity-building and training programmes for civil society groups as well as for
human rights protection; organisation of various forms of electoral assistance, including the
development of electoral law, a code of conduct, and electoral councils; and support for the
corruption-free administration. Promoting economic and social rehabilitation and
transformation is the third core sector in peacebuilding that involves fostering conditions for
resumed economic and social development; sustainable return and reintegration of displaced
persons and refugees; confidence-building measures conducive to national reconciliation;
attention to the needs of youth and women, especially young men; providing social services
(health education, water and sanitation); job creation, microcredit schemes and the
promotion of income-generating activities; reconstructing roads, bridges and railways to
provide access to war-devastated areas for resettlement and agricultural production; and
psychosocial trauma counselling for the victims of war.

13.5 PRINCIPAL CHALLENGES

Peacebuilding faces many challenges to overcome. They range from the temptation to
provide quick fix solutions, as also the urge to impose economic and political systems
without ascertaining the wishes of the target states and peoples, the bureaucratic politics
within and among the variety of actors, to the resource short-fall. Failure to address them
effectively could mean undoing of the idea of peacebuilding. We shall elaborate some of
these challenges below.
It is true that peacebuilding so far has focused on the immediate underlying causes of conflict
– to the relative neglect of deep-seated factors for both political compulsions and financial
constraints. There are important differences in how various actors see the complex task of
peacebuilding and the many priorities it entails. The quick-fix nature of response by external
actors engaged in peacebuilding is possibly a reflection of belief that liberalisation, largely
defined as the movement toward democracy, markets, and the rule of law, is the best way to
develop a positive peace in poor countries. One should be watchful about the particular
version of peacebuilding that is being institutionalised. The question as to how to
implement peacebuilding in particular areas must not be settled solely by the external players
without paying attention to the concerns of the recipient states themselves. International
actors could best advise and cannot impose their priorities and prejudices (Barnett, 2007,
p.36).

The peacebuilders’ ability to build institutions for peace and democracy in divided societies
is inherently limited by several structural and political constraints. Fundamentally, the ability
of the UN to achieve its objectives in peace building depends on (i) the political will of
member states, (ii) the interests and incentives of the major actors on the ground, and (iii) the
structure and capacity of local institutions. Peacebuilding - whether by the UN or outside it -
cannot create the conditions for its own success; these conditions must already exist or
evolve. Success thus depends in part on peace builders’ ability to read the politics of a
particular conflict, and to recognize where and when the necessary conditions for peace
building obtain or can be fostered –and where and when they do not exist (Bertram, 1995,
p.401). Again, the bureaucratic politics could become a challenge for effective
peacebuilding. As noted already, notwithstanding broad agreement on what peacebuilding
implies in the UN for example, there continues to be considerable variation in the meaning of
peacebuilding because bureaucratic organisations in the UN or within governments are likely
to adopt a meaning of peacebuilding that is consistent with their already existing mandates,
worldviews, and organisational interests. The result is that while everyone might support the
idea of building peace, they will operate with considerable differences of interpretation
regarding the meaning and practice of peacebuilding (Barnett, 2007, p.53).
Unfortunately, much of the interest we see in peacebuilding is at the level of rhetoric and not
at the level of resources. It receives little meaningful financial and political support relative
to the costs of renewed conflict. For example, the Post-Conflict Fund of the World Bank
disbursed a total of 66.7 million dollars during 1997-2004. The 2004 budget of the USAID
Office of Transition Initiatives was 54.6 million; in 2005 it was $48.6 million, which means
that it received only 3.5 percent of a total USAID budget of $9.1 billion. Similarly the
peacebuilding fund at the disposal of the PBC of the UN is approximately $270 million
meant to be utilised in numerous countries that are growing.

13.6 SUMMARY

The concept of peacebuilding in the 1990s became “more expansive”, combining conflict
prevention, conflict management and post-conflict reconstruction. It is no longer an exact
term; it often needs the qualifier “post-conflict” peacebuilding to refer primarily to the non-
military or civilian dimensions of international efforts to support countries emerging from
conflict – even though it might accompany or succeed military operations. Furthermore,
peacebuilding straddles different departments across governments and organisations.

Peacebuilding will continue to require international assistance in the coming years and
decades, despite multiple shortcomings and weaknesses. If the UN and other external actors
who were in the forefront of post-conflict peacebuilding of the 1990s decide that
peacebuilding is too important an enterprise to give up, they face a dual challenge. They
need to learn from and further improve upon the innovative but modest gains made to date in
peacebuilding policy and practice. Although never divorced from state interests,
peacebuilding represented a collective international project. The international commitment
to peacebuilding is under threat from three main sources. Firstly, to the heightened urgency
of security threats posed by terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the
new arms race among states. When confronted with “hard” threats to their national interests,
states inevitably re-order their priorities, diplomatic energies and financial resources.
Peacebuilding needs are sidelined as an international concern with lesser priority (Tschirgi,
2004, p.17). Second, post-conflict peacebuilding assumes the essentiality of domestic
ownership while external actors need to play a supportive role. However, since 9/11,
peacebuilding has been conflated with a new discourse of “nation-building”, “regime
change,” and “stabilization and reconstruction” which is predicated on the necessity of
forcefully securing the stability of weak or failing states to avoid the negative fall-out from
state failure. Such thinking, driven primarily by external actors, is likely to undermine the
basic agreement that peace, security and stability cannot be imposed from outside but need to
be nurtured internally through patient, flexible, responsive strategies that are in tune with
domestic strategies. Third, the post 9/11 “stabilization” agenda is cast in the same terms as
the peacebuilding agenda of the early 1990s, with a call for holistic, joined-up approaches to
avoid state failure and state collapse. In other words, the drivers of stabilization agenda are
the national security interests of dominant external actors – regionally and internationally
(Tschirgi, 2004, p.17).

13.6 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

1. Define peacebuilding. How do you differentiate between peacekeeping and

peacemaking on the one hand and peacebuilding on the other?

2. Ambiguity may not necessarily be bad for the effectiveness of peacebuilding. Do you
agree?

3. Analyse three chief tasks of peacebuilding. Is it possible to suggest a hierarchy

among them?

4. Examine the major dimensions such as multiple pillars and multiple levels and
multiple actors associated with operationalisation of peacebuilding strategies.

5. Discuss three major impediments to peacebuilding.

SUGGESTED READINGS

Kofi Annan., “No Exit Without Strategy”, Report of the Secretary-General to the UN
Security Council (Doc.S/2001/394, 20 April 2001).
Boutros Boutros-Ghalli., An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and
Peace-keeping, United Nations Department of Public Information, New York, 1992.
Simon Chesterman., You, the People: The United Nations, Transitional Administration, and
State-Building, Oxford University Press, New York, 2004.
Eva Bertram., “Reinventing Governments: The Promise and Perils of United Nations Peace
Building”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol.39, no.3, Sep 1995, pp.387-418.

Michael Barnett., et al, “Peacebuilding: What Is in a Name?” Global Governance, vol.13,

no.1, January-March 2007, pp.35-58.
Michelle Maiese., “What It Means to Build a Lasting Peace”, Knowledge Base Essay on
Peacebuilding, September 2003, available at www.beyondintractability.org
Robert C. Orr., Winning the Peace: American Strategy for Post-Conflict Reconstruction,
Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington DC, 2004.

Roland Paris., At War’s End: Building Peace After Civil Conflict, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 2004.
Necla Tschirgi., Post-Conflict Peacebuilding Revisited: Achievements, Limitations,
Challenges, International Peace Academy, New York, 2004.
Peter Uvin., “The Development/Peacebuilding Nexus: A Typology and History of Changing
Paradigms”, Journal of Peacebuilding and Development, vol.1, no.1, 2002.
Websites:

www.beyondintractability.org
www.securitycouncilreport.org
 UNIT 14 APPROACHES TO PEACEBUILDING

Structure

14.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
14.2 Conceptions of Peacebuilding
14.3 Integrated or WoG Approach
14.4 Political Democracy Approach
14.5 Peace versus Justice Approach
14.6 Reconstructive Versus Transformative Approaches
14.7 Top, Middle and Grassroot Approaches
14.8 Civil Society or Transformational Approach
14.9 Feminist Approach
14.10 Summary
14.11 Terminal Questions
Suggested Readings

14.1 INTRODUCTION

Peacebuilding, today, is one of the well-established sub-fields of international peace

operations and has become especially interesting as it has had the distinction of being
located in a so far unchartered terrain of post-conflict activities i.e. when guns have
stopped firing and there is a tacit or explicit ceasefire agreement between parties to the
conflict. This is where conventional UN peacekeeping would normally come to an end
and the UN forces would depart leaving parties to conflict to resolve their conflict using
political processes. It is in this process of strengthening peace after end of violence that a
ceasefire agreement has come to be the watershed point from where peacebuilding
emerges as a specialised enterprise.

The foundations of the contemporary concept of ‘Peacebuilding’ were laid formally in

1992 in UN Secretary General, Boutros Boutros-Ghali’s report, An Agenda for Peace.
This UN report defined peacebuilding as “actions to identify and support structures which
will tend to strengthen and solidify peace in order to avoid a relapse into conflict.” Even
though the UN peacekeeping forces had been engaged in similar responsibilities since the
early 1960s, this new mandate has since made peacebuilding both a specialised field as
also an integral part of international peace and conflict resolution thinking and practices
around the world.

As of now, peacebuilding does not yet have a precise agreed definition other than that it
locates itself in the unique ‘post-conflict’ context where the traditional peacekeeping was
expected to come to an end. Nevertheless, even at the end of conflict, peacebuilding
seems to comprise of a rather expansive mandate that involves a whole range of activities
associated with capacity building, reconciliation, and societal transformation all aimed at
building and strengthening norms, behaviours, and institutions for sustaining post-conflict
peace. This makes peacebuilding a rather long-drawn process that begins when violence,
in a given conflict, either ends or at least begins to slow down, allowing these efforts to be
made for establishing a lasting post-conflict peace.

Aims and Objectives

This Unit aims to help you to

· Appreciate that peacebuilding is a long-time effort that requires diligent designing

and painstaking execution from different perspectives;
· Learn the main proponents of different approaches and their chief arguments;
· Recognise that various approaches highlight different dimensions of
peacebuilding – political, social, economic, administrative, structural, or
transformative; and
· Appreciate the emphasis these approaches place on values like justice, national
ownership, and international commitment

14.2 CONCEPTIONS OF PEACEBUILDING

One reason for the ever expanding interest in peacekeeping paradigm to ‘stay on’ even
when a violent part of conflict has ended and ceasefire agreement is signed came from the
fact that most post-Cold War conflicts of 1990s were not inter- but intra-state conflicts.
First, such conflicts often arose from and often dissipated gradually into sporadic and
low-intensity violence obscuring a distinct break between war and peace situation.
Second, this also made equations between parties to conflict very asymmetric which
attracted larger involvement of civil society actors and external agencies like the UN to
ensure that state was not allowed to renege from its agreed commitments in their ceasefire
agreement. Finally, what made the NGOs as also other civil society actors and agencies
active players in academic discourses on and practices of peacebuilding was their
conviction in favour of a wider conception of peacebuilding; much wider than what was
adopted in An Agenda for Peace as also by the other agencies of the UN.

Academic protagonists of peacebuilding propagate a wider definition and treat it as an

umbrella concept that includes traditional as well as expanded peacekeeping
responsibilities. At the least, this implies long-term engagements of peacebuilding
operations. Several of them seek to include various specific tasks like setting up
mechanisms for early warning, violence prevention, advocacy, intervention, humanitarian
relief, ceasefire and establishment of peace as part of peacebuilding efforts. Even the so-
called narrower definitions of peacebuilding involves addressing the root causes of
conflict which make repatriation, rehabilitation, reintegration, reconciliation, as also
institution-building and socio-economic (if not political) transformation of the conflict
zone a central task to it. In the wider kinds of definitions, peacebuilding is seen as aiming
at creating ‘positive’ peace which does not limit itself to simple ‘absence of physical
violence’ but extends to attending to sources of invisible or ‘structural’ violence.

The definitions lying in the middle ground of these two extremes emphasize how peace to
become sustainable requires a stable social equilibrium. This is to ensure that new
disputes are not allowed to sprout and escalate into another violent conflict. This means
that these peacebuilding efforts must go beyond conflict prevention or conflict
management and try and ‘fix’ the underlying root causes that lie in the patterns of socio-
political behaviours reflected through institutional if not norm-building efforts for
conflict-resolution. This line of thinking underlines the need for conflict transformation
which requires parties to conflict to move away from confrontation and work towards
participation in joint peaceful transactions that are aimed at evolving a relationship of
harmony and interdependence. This however remains an extremely ambitious, almost
idealistic, proposition.

The only point on which broad consensus has emerged amongst scholars is that
peacebuilding is considered clearly a post-conflict activity. Further area of agreement is
the inevitable need to address ‘underlying causes’ and not just the visible effects of a
violent conflict. Beyond this premise, peacebuilding remains still a highly contested
paradigm. But evolving from these broad contours of its core responsibility area it has
been gradually evolving through its actual operations. This is also because, in actual
practice, peacebuilding has become fairly regular and acceptable activity in international
relations. From that perspective, it continues to be often used as a catch-all term to
describe all the actors and elements of post-conflict stabilising and rebuilding efforts that
may include preventive diplomacy, institution building, engaging and empowering local
populations, ensuring local ownership, capacity building which makes it almost akin to
nation-building. No doubt Roland Paris says that ‘scholars have devoted relatively little
attention to analyzing the concept of peace-building itself, including its underlying
assumptions’ which places peacebuilding at best etymologically at its adolescence.

Given these aforesaid limitations, one comprehensive definition of peacebuilding is

provided by Rebecca Spence in her chapter on “Post-Conflict Peacebuilding: Who
Determines the Peace” in Bronwyn Evans-Kent edited volume on Transformative
peacebuilding in post-conflict reconstruction: The Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina
(2001). To quote her, peacebuilding includes –

...those activities and processes that focus on the root causes of the conflict,
rather than just the effects; support the rebuilding and rehabilitation of all
sectors of war-torn society; encourage and support interaction between all
sectors of society in order to repair damaged relations and start the process
of restoring dignity and trust; recognize the specifics of each post-conflict
situation; encourage and support the participation of indigenous resources
in the design, implementation and sustainment of activities and processes;
and promote processes that will endure after the initial emergency recovery
phase has passed.

In recent years there has been a trend in favour of adopting multi-faceted, multi-agency,
system-wide approaches to peacebuilding. These approaches have common aspects and
are convergent in nature, while it is true that experts seek to privilege one or the other
specific element in presenting their favoured approach as more viable than others. While
there have been multiple ways to categorising approaches to peacebuilding some of the
well-known approaches to peacebuilding include the following.
14.3 INTEGRATED OR WoG APPROACH

A few governments have begun to realise that post-conflict security sector reforms, as the
foremost sector of peacebuilding, needs an integrated or Whole of Government (WoG)
approach in order to align development agencies with military, intelligence agencies,
police, prisons and civil society. This approach has lately become popular and has come
to be defined as one where a government actively uses formal and informal networks
across different agencies for effective coordination of both the design and implementation
of the peacebuilding agreements. The focus clearly remains on greater ‘coordination’
amongst various governmental agencies, both in the theatre of post-conflict operations as
also amongst donor governments and other international agencies.

Establishment of inter-departmental organisations in major states like United Kingdom

and United States in 2004 characterises this approach. The UK had set up the Post-
Conflict and Reconstruction Unit (PCRU) which is now known as Stabilization Unit.
Similarly in the US, the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization
(S/CRS) was created within the State Department. Similarly, Australia too adopted this
approach in 2006 through a White Paper on its Aid Programme and inception of Office of
Development Effectiveness. However encouraging these initiatives are, the promise of
the WoG approach might be severely tested in fragile and unstable states where no formal
structures and clear division of labour exist.

14.4 POLITICAL DEMOCRACY APPROACH

One lesson learnt from the experience of peacekeeping operations in the past two decades
concerns the value of local-level governance and related institutions in sustaining peace
after ceasefire has been signed. Democratic validation of peace agreements between
authorities and rebels and later by masses has come to be seen as essential for
peacebuilding. But, at the same time, both democracy and peacebuilding remain
intrinsically political in nature and do have possibilities of leading to a zero-sum
relationship. This means that not all gains for one imply gains for the opposite side. It is
this complex relationship of democracy and peacebuilding through mechanisms like
political participation and governance that forms the core of political democracy
approach.

Charles Call and Susan Cook in their book Reconstructing Justice and Security after War
(Washington DC: United States Institute of Peace, 2007) examine this ‘political
democracy’ approach. After studying experiences of post-conflict democracy and
peacebuilding in places like Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan, they conclude that
‘patience’ must be the hallmark of both peacebuilding and good governance processes.
This approach is also called war-to-democracy approach to peacebuilding.

14.5 PEACE VERSUS JUSTICE APPROACH

There are some who conceive peacebuilding in terms exclusively of either ‘peace’ or
‘justice’ driven approaches. The ‘peace’ driven approach puts emphasis on ‘saving lives’
and allows accommodation, even appeasement, of aggressor to swiftly achieve cessation
 of hostilities and violence in a conflict. Elizabeth Cousens calls it ‘political peacebuilding’
which seeks to create authoritative and eventually legitimate mechanisms which may
empower the polity to handle conflict without violence and to apply established
procedures for resolving rival claims and grievances. Though this approach is normally
effective in ensuring negative peace, they lack the appreciation of ‘victim’s perspective’
since the protagonists of the peace approach tend to treat victim and aggressor as equals.
Furthermore, this approach could threaten to fuel the aggressor’s appetite for more
conflict.

On the other hand, the ‘justice’ driven approach to peacebuilding sees building ‘negative
peace’ as job only half done which may not go far in building a sustainable peace. This
approach seeks to go beyond cessation of violence and explore issues of reconciliation,
truth and justice. So, in addition to hard-nosed bargain for mutual benefits it seeks to
evolve provisions that appeal to the sense of fairness in the eye of parties as well as their
respective support bases and therefore worth honouring. In the context of peacebuilding,
justice for them embodies four components: truth, fairness, rectitude and
retribution/requital. While truth involves an accurate understanding and recording of the
causes of conflict, fairness implies impartiality without any undue pressure on either of the
parties to conflict. Similarly, rectitude relates to a sense of integrity and righteousness,
whereas and retribution/requital means compassion for victims and punishment for
aggressors.

14.6 RECONSTRUCTIVE VERSUS TRANSFORMATIVE APPROACHES

Prof. Bronwyn Evans-Kent in his book Transformative peacebuilding in post-conflict

reconstruction: The Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina dwells on peacebuilding strategies –
which he identifies as ‘reconstructive’ in approach – as applied in multilateral initiatives
under international institutions like the UN. As opposed to this is the ‘transformative’
approach often adopted by the civil society actors and NGOs as part of their bottom-up
initiatives. According to Kent, both these sets of approaches are two sides of the same coin
and complement each other if balanced appropriately. Hence, too much focus on one is not
going to be effective, as for instance excessive focus by the UN on reconstruction activities
has undermined its transformative capacities.

Reconstructive approaches concern themselves with more tangible aspects of peacebuilding

such as addressing infrastructure needs like roads, communications, healthcare and public
institutions where benefits and outcomes are immediate and easily measurable. Usually the
UN post-conflict reconstruction involves (a) monitoring ceasefire, (b) disarming and
demobilising rebels and ensuring their reintegration through security sector reforms, and (c)
supervising or conducting elections. But given this ‘tool-kit’ of peacebuilding, it often
begins to become too rigid and therefore vulnerable to donor agencies’ expansive reporting
processes and preferences. Instead, these need to be locally rooted, intensive and
contextualised. Moreover, these efforts of the UN peacebuilding have often been accused of
being driven by major powers’ desire to implant democracy and free-market economy.

Transformative approach, on the other hand, seeks to address exactly these lacunae i.e. less
focus on physical reconstruction and more focus on transforming social relationship within
and amongst the given conflict-prone communities. As the very first thing, their outcomes
remain less measurable and its processes normally time-taking. But then transformative
approach seeks to address not only manifest but also latent triggers of conflict that impel
the conflict protagonists to see violence as only means of redress. It also believes that
parties to conflict are not necessarily homogenous social entities. Therefore, the focus
would be on addressing both the manifest and the felt needs for recognition of respective
collective identities - and doing so in such a manner that this recognition does not appear to
threaten other parties.

Lisa Schirch in her book Rituals and Symbols in Peacebuilding (Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian
Press, 2005) believes that rituals and symbols may be useful for reducing direct violence.
Rituals and symbols, she says, are widely used either to symbolically communicate
commitment to nonviolence or to heal trauma or to transform relationships. However, it
may be noted that symbols and rituals are not the mainstay of peacebuilding but only
complement real tools and processes of peacebuilding like dialogue or mediation. On their
own, rituals and symbols cannot adequately address conflict and peacebuilding.

14.7 TOP, MIDDLE AND GRASSROOT APPROACHES

Taking cue from the three-level model identified with one of the most respected scholars in
the field, John Paul Lederach, Luc Reychler and Thania Paffenholz in their book
Peacebuilding: A Field Guide have classified approaches to peacebuilding as top, middle
and grassroots level approaches.

At the top level, peacebuilding normally involves a top-down approach which has the
following salient features. First, it normally involves very eminent and influential yet
singular personalities. These are people with a visible public profile, working as peace-
builders or norm-entrepreneurs, and who operate as intermediaries or mediators. They often
have strong backing from governments of major powers, important international agencies as
also from the parties to the conflict. Second, it usually involves very high-level leaders from
amongst parties to the conflict and these peace-builders generally act on their own to
facilitate a dialogue between these high profile protagonists of the given conflict. Such
negotiations are normally arranged by these high-profile peace-builders at some neutral
venue and they also help facilitate setting up the tone (sometimes even agenda) for a
successful mutual bargaining amongst major protagonists in the given conflict.

At the middle level, there remains a whole range of middle ranking leaders (including
identifiable policy- and opinion-makers). If integrated properly, these mid-ranking leaders
can provide key to creating ‘infrastructure’ or atmospherics for achieving an effective
peacebuilding by the top level. There are several practical and professional approaches that
are applied in this category of interactions amongst mid-ranking protagonists of conflict.
These include (a) problem-solving workshops, (b) conflict resolution training programmes,
and (c) setting up of peace commissions and/or truth and reconciliation commissions. These
approaches have been particularly emphasized in conflict-resolution discourses as an
addition; these mid-ranking protagonists may also become useful contact point to reach out
to the wider masses that form the core of grass-root approaches to peacebuilding.
The grassroot approaches remain distinct as they focus not on protagonists but on victims of
a given conflict and these normally involve massive numbers. Grassroot approaches deal
with only those protagonists who may be working with local (victim) communities and can
facilitate peacebuilders’ access to the masses. At this level, issues in survival-mode, such as
providing them with food, shelter and safety, assume the top priority. From this perspective,
although their miseries flow from an unresolved larger conflict, conflict resolution efforts
might appear to be a diversionary luxury. Guided by the immediate needs and priorities, the
grass roots approaches could often remain focused on ad hoc fire-fighting rather than
evolving long-term planning which is the essence of peacebuilding.

14.8 CIVIL SOCIETY OR TRANSFORMATIONAL APPROACH

The civil-society or transformational approach to peacebuilding and conflict resolution

involves the development of an interactive, interdependent web of activities and
relationships amongst elite and grass roots to build, what Louis Kriesberg calls ‘culture of
peace’. It is widely accepted that non-governmental organisations are a prominent
component of the civil society.

As Jonathan Goodhand notes, non-governmental organisations further the goals of

peacebuilding in both indirect and direct ways like supporting local leadership, human rights
monitoring and protection, facilitating good governance, constitutional reforms, local
capacity building, and development of alternative livelihoods. While activities that could
have direct bearing on peacebuilding include conflict monitoring, mediation, security sector
reforms, advocacy, education and building peace constituencies, those of indirect category
tend to mainstream peacebuilding into ongoing activities.

Thania Paffenholz and Christoph Spurk, in their monograph Civil Society, Civil
Engagement, and Peacebuilding (Social Development Paper No. 36, October 2006), suggest
the need for a holistic and comprehensive approach to relate civil society to post-conflict
peacebuilding. At the same time they caution us against expecting miracles from the civil
society’s role. Among the points made in this regard are the following: (1) Civil society
comprises of not just non-governmental organisations but other bodies which together have
important roles to play in peacebuilding. (2) The acknowledgement of the importance of
civil society does not mean that state is any less important. (3) Enthusiasm over support to
the civil society role has to be based on a full understanding of its imprecise character and
composition. (4) It may not be accurate to assume that all civil society functions are equally
effective in all post-conflict phases. (5) For a critical assessment of the civil society’s
impact on peacebuilding, the timing and sequencing of various civil society functions need
to be borne in mind.

14.9 FEMINIST APPROACH

Feminists regret that feminist approaches have been underutilised in peacebuilding at

community, national and international level. Women are often seen as aping the mainstream
(read malestream) as an easy way to be accepted and to make contributions to
peacebuilding. Feminists believe that in spite of women’s continued marginalisation in
international peace and security discourses, their work in actual peacebuilding has been
substantial in almost all societies, and that its importance is being increasingly recognised
across the world. They call for gendering of peacebuilding approaches and strategies and
urge for inclusion of women’s skills and capabilities into peacebuilding, especially in
projects like healing, reconciliation, reintegration and demilitarisation.

McKey and Mazurana, for example, bring out in their book Women & Peacebuilding
(Montreal: Rights & Democracy, 2001) as to how women pursue different and largely
nonviolent approaches to social change. Women are relevant in peacebuilding process
involving relationship building, cooperation, networking, psychological and spiritual
processes and above all reconciliation and human relationships.

14.10 SUMMARY

It is clear from the discussion so far in this Unit that there is no single approach that is either
universally accepted or uniformly applicable across a wide spectrum of conflict situations.
Each conflict is unique in its own way; therefore a right mix of approaches would be
naturally necessary. We have learned that scholars and thinkers have come up with a
variety of approaches to highlight different aspects in peacebuilding. For example, the top,
middle and grassroot approaches identify the interlinkages among the three levels at which
peacebuilding needs to be pursued for the best possible results. On a different note, another
approach emphasizes the need to adopt an integrated, coordinated approach for
peacebuilding. The clear choice to be made between peace and justice is the essence of
another approach. Similarly, the role and relevance of civil society and/or non-
governmental organisations have become the prime concerns of some other approaches. It
is remarkable that the feminist theory too has important perspectives to offer on the promise
women hold in transforming attitudes so that peace becomes sustainable. Notably, however,
these approaches have much in common amongst them. Hence, it may not be advisable to
stress only one approach and reject other approaches.

In the end, two things distinguish peacebuilding from other similar activities. Firstly, it is an
activity located in post-conflict context. Secondly, it seeks to address deep-rooted,
underlying causes of conflict rather than deal only with the visible violence. An effective
peacebuilding approach, therefore, has to be grounded on deeper understanding about the
parties to conflict. This requires peacebuilding effort to be sensitive to, and show an
understanding towards, the feuding parties’ history and society as also their political and
strategic culture. At the same time, successful peacebuilding requires national ownership on
the one hand, and a clear division of labour between national and international actors and
agencies. Given its evolutionary nature, it also needs to be innovative to keep evolving in
the face of real time challenges. This requires huge staying power in terms of commitment
and resources as also patience; peacebuilding processes will continue to be really long-
drawn and piecemeal as they seek to ensure building a sustainable peace.

14.11 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

1. Discuss the main characteristics of top, middle and grassroot levels approach and
contrast this approach from other approaches.
 2. Which are the approaches, in your understanding, that question the conventional
wisdom that peacebuilding is the responsibility of political and national leaders
alone?
3. Highlight the salient points of reconstructive versus transformative approach and
peace versus justice approach.
4. What advantages and disadvantages do the civil society actors have in the context
of peacebuilding and conflict resolution?
5. Do you agree that there can be no single and universally reliable approach to
peacebuilding? Give reasons.

SUGGESTED READINGS

Bertram, Eva., “Reinventing Governments: The Promise and Perils of United Nations Peace
Building”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 39 (3), 1995, pp.387-418.

Boutros-Ghali, Boutros., An Agenda for Peace 2nd ed, UN Department of Public

Information, New York, 1995.

Cousens, Elizabeth M., Chetan Kumar, and Karin Wemester., (eds.), Peacebuilding as
Politics: Cultivating Peace in Fragile Societies, Lynne Rienner, Boulder CO, 2001.

Cutillo, Alberto., “International Assistance to Countries Emerging from Conflict: A Review

of Fifteen Years of Interventions and the Future of Peacebuilding”, Paper compiled for the
International Peace Academy, New York, 2006, (www.reliefweb.int)

De Coning, Cedric., “Coherence and integration in the planning, implementation and

evaluation of complex peacebuilding operations”, Conflict Trends, Durban: ACCORD, Vol ,
2004, pp.41-48; access at www.accord.org.za

De Coning, Cedric., “Civil-Military Coordination and UN Peacebuilding Operations”, 2005,

(www.trainingforpeace.org/pub/accord/civmil2005.pdf )

Dixon, Paul., “Consociationalism and the Northern Ireland Peace Process: The Glass Half
Full or Half Empty”, Nationalism & Ethnic Politics, Vol. 3, no.3, 1997, pp.20-36.

Doyle, Michael W, and Nicholas Sambanis., “International Peacebuilding: A Theoretical

and Quantitative Analysis”, World Bank Research Paper, 2000, (August)
(www.worldbank.org/research)

Galtung, Johan., “Three Approaches to Peace: Peacekeeping, Peacemaking and

Peacebuilding,” in his Peace, War and Defense – Essays in Peace Research, Christian
Eljers, Copenhagen, Vol.2, 1975, pp.282-304.

Goodhand, Jonathan., “Working ‘in’ and ‘on’ war”, in Helel Yanacopulos, Hanlon, Joseph
(eds.), Civil War, Civil Peace, James Currey Publishers, Oxford, 2006.
Heinrich, W., Building Peace: Experience of Collaborative Peacebuilding in Somalia,
1993-96, Life and Peace Institute, Uppsala, 1996.

Lederach, John Paul., “Conflict Transformation in Protracted Internal Conflicts: The Case
for a Comprehensive Framework”, in Rupesinghe, K., (ed.), Conflict Transformation, St.
Martin’s Press, Houndmills, 1995.

Lederach, John Paul., Preparing for Peace: Conflict Transformation Across Cultures,
Syracuse University Press. Syracuse, NY, 1995

Lederbach, John Paul., Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies, US

Institute of Peace, Washington DC, 1992.

MacKey, Susan, and Dyan Mazurana., Women & Peacebuilding, Rights & Democracy,
Montreal, 2001, January.

Paris, Dan., At War’s End: Building Peace After Civil Conflict, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 2004.

Paris, Roland., “Peacebuilding and the Limits of Liberal Internationalism”. International

Security. 22 (2), 1997, pp.54-89.

Regehr, Ernie., “The Challenge of Peacebuilding – Rebuilding peace in war-torn and war-
threatened societies”, Ploughshares Monito, 1995, http://www.ploughshares,ca/content/
MONITOR/mond95a.html.

Reychler L, and T Paffenholz., (eds.), Peacebuilding: A Field Guide, Lynne Rienner,

Boulder CO, 2001.

Sampson, Cynthia, Mohammed Abu-Nimer, Claudia Liebler and Diana Whitney., Positive
Approaches to Peacebuilding: A Resource for Innovators, Pact Publications, New York,
2003.

Schirch, Lisa., Ritual and symbol in peacebuilding, Kumarian Press, Bloomfield CT, 2005.

Smith, Dan., Towards a Strategic Framework for Peacebuilding: Getting Their Act
Together, Overview report of the Joint Utstein Study of Peacebuilding, PRIO, Oslo, 2004.

UN Department for Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis, An Inventory of
Post-Conflict Peacebuilding Activities, United Nations, New York, 1996.
UNIT 15 POST-CONFLICT RECONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION
Structure
15.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
15.2 Defining Post-conflict Re-construction and Rehabilitation
15.3 Actors and Stakeholders
15.4 Post-conflict Fund and the Role of World Bank, Asian Development Bank (ADB)
and Africa Development Bank (AfDB)
15.5 Case Study: Re-construction and Rehabilitation of the Tamils in Sri Lanka
15.6 Summary
15.7 Terminal Questions
Suggested Readings

15.1 INTRODUCTION

Conflict has been a feature of human history and has shaped civilisations. It emerges from
political differences and ideological divides between religions and ethnicities. Conflicts
among societies and people also arise from failed political institutions resulting in poor
governance, lack of political and social justice, accountability and transparency of the
government, corruption, abuse of political power and high levels of poverty. These
deficiencies in governance have resulted in civil war that threatened the stability of states.

At another level, conflicts arise due to clash of interests over national values among states,
groups of states, organisations, organised groups who are ever so aggressive to uphold their
views and interests and win their cases.

In contemporary times, conflicts have become transnational in nature and its actors have
challenged state authority. At another level, nature-based causes such as climate change has
further contributed to conflicts among humans. These varying forms of conflicts leave
societies destroyed with long and lasting adversarial impacts on the lives of people.

According to “Global Conflict Barometer”, a report published by the Institute for

International Conflict Research at the University of Heidelberg, there were 365 political
conflicts recorded in 2009 and these included seven wars and 24 severe crises that witnessed
massive violence. Further, the number of conflicts increased from 353 in 2008 to 365 in
2009. The report also notes that the total number of non-violent conflicts rose by ten, as did
the number of crises. However, the number of highly violent conflicts decreased from nine
wars and 30 severe crises, i.e. a total of 39 highly violent conflicts, in 2008 to 31 highly
violent conflicts in 2009.

The report clearly reflects that the contemporary world continues to be less peaceful and
violent force is repeatedly used in an organised way. Therefore there is a need for greater
engagement by the international community to prevent conflicts, wars, and crisis among the
people. In the above context, post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation is a critical step
for longer-term peace and stability and requires the responsiveness of a variety of actors, state
and non-state, either unilaterally or multilaterally.

Aims and Objectives

This Unit would enable you to understand

• The dynamics of post-conflict re-construction and rehabilitation in order to achieving

the overarching goals of sustainable peace and prosperity.
• The definition of the post-conflict re-construction and rehabilitation
• The identification of the actors and stakeholders.
• The process of re-construction and rehabilitation of the Tamils in Sri Lanka in the
post-LTTE period (case study).

15.2 UNDERSTANDING POST-CONFLICT RECONSTRUCTION AND

REHABILITATION

Although the Cold War ended the great power rivalry, it witnessed large number of intrastate
conflicts particularly among the developing countries. During the 1990s, nearly one third of
the world’s countries were afflicted with armed conflict and nearly two-thirds of these
experienced conflict particularly in Asia, Africa and Latin America. These entailed
international attention and global collective action in post-conflict reconstruction.

The World Bank defines post-conflict reconstruction as “the rebuilding of the socioeconomic
framework of society” and the “reconstruction of the enabling conditions for a functioning
peacetime society [to include] the framework of governance and rule of law.” It is noted that
post-conflict reconstruction is a process of rebuilding war-affected communities and
‘includes the process of rebuilding the political, security, social and economic dimensions of
a society emerging from conflict. It also includes addressing the root causes of the conflict
and promoting social and economic justice as well as putting in place political structures of
governance and the rule of law in order to consolidate peace building, reconciliation and
development.’ This entails delivering social and economic development, providing
governance and the rule of law including justice and reconciliation and longer-term
development assistance.

It has also been argued that there is ‘no definition for post-conflict rehabilitation and peace-
building that has been agreed to by the consensus needed in order for them to be used by the
different actors that participate in the process.’

For the purpose of this chapter, Post- conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation can be defined
as the process of developing long-term programmes that are designed for improving the
economic well being of the affected societies and people and also developing institutions that
can deliver governance, and political and social justice.
In the aftermath of any violent conflict and military interventions, the need for post-conflict
reconstruction and rehabilitation becomes central. A variety of agencies including
international organisations and coalitions of countries are in the forefront to bring in their
respective capacities for restoration or transformation of the fragile social capital. There is
also a need for a greater commitment to postconflict reconstruction and rehabilitation in areas
and societies to develop strategies that close the gap between humanitarian assistance and
development, and help to organise cooperation and partnership.

At another level, the economic penalty of conflict includes capital flight, economic decline,
high defence spending, and structural changes to the economy. Post-conflict economic
recovery is also dependent on the responses by the private sector.

In its broad sense, reconstruction entails rebuilding of governance structures, institutions, and
conditions that had existed prior to war. It also includes the rehabilitation and restoration of
basic services like health and education. However, the biggest challenge facing countries is to
define the priority areas in the post-conflict reconstruction programme and how to
reconstruct. This issues gains salience due to the fact that all peacetime conditions, though
desirable, cannot be reconstructed in short time and would need to be prioritised.

15.3 ACTORS AND STAKEHOLDERS

It is an acknowledged fact that no single actor can manage the post-conflict reconstruction
and rehabilitation and requires the assistance and support of a variety of actors both at the
government and non-government level. Among these, the governments are the most
important players and without their support, rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts will
yield little in improving the well-being of the affected people. Multilateral institutions such as
the United Nations and financial institutions such as the World Bank and the Asian
Development Bank emerged as significant stakeholders in the process of reconstruction and
rehabilitation by providing fiscal support outside the national budget process. The non-
governmental organisations (NGOs) and other development agencies too are critical for the
purposes of relief and emergency assistance.

At the societal level, women have a major role to play in the post-conflict re-construction and
rehabilitation process. Though the military is a coercive tool of the state, it has an important
role in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of war torn societies. It has an important role in
ensuring a viable and an effective domestic security system through the civil police agencies
and ensue that democratic civilians are able to ensure law and order.

Role of the State

The state is the primary actor in the post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts. It
should formulate and lead the development strategy and be in the driver’s seat. The
government must undertake economic recovery and structural adjustment programmes to
restore macroeconomic stability and bring down inflation. It must be noted that the private
sector has an important role to play and be an effective instrument that can support the
government deliver sustained growth. Also, economic growth requires the active participation
of the population.

The task of rebuilding the nation and reconstructing social and physical infrastructure is
critical for post-conflict re-construction and rehabilitation. The post-conflict period requires
major health sector reforms and investments in education, investment with smooth flow of
funds reaching to the grass root level. It should also define the objective of post-conflict
reconstruction process, identify institutional and human resource development needs, and
clearly spell the capacity building strategy.

At another level, there must be close collaboration between the government and the
international community including international financial institutions for availability of fiscal
resources, grants and loans. The externally funded investments must be controlled by the
Government and these must fit well into the national development programme to achieve
fruition over the longer term. Further, aid cannot be effective unless the state has a robust
institutional framework that allows the rule of law to prevail.

The government must evolve long term plans for development that are fully integrated in
national development policies, plans and strategies. For that it must have in place an efficient
institutional and administrative machinery to formulate, coordinate, and implement policies,
strategies, programmes, and projects. The focus should be on good governance and sound
economic management. In essence, the government must promote security and human
development, rebuild infrastructure for economic growth, and create conditions for private
sector participation for a sustainable and inclusive economic growth.

Role of the UN
During the Cold War period, the UN mandate for international governance entailed
supporting states to monitor borders and ceasefires, and in the conduct and monitoring of
elections. However, in the post Cold War period, the UN has been increasingly engaged in
post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation missions. In 1992, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the
Former UN Secretary-General, in the landmark An Agenda for Peace set out an international
strategy for conflict prevention, peacemaking, peacekeeping, post-conflict reconstruction and
peace building. Since then post-conflict reconstruction has been an agenda for the UN in its
efforts to rebuild war-affected communities. In 2005, Kofi Annan’s, then Secretary-General,
report, In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All
recommended that UN member states ‘establish a Peace building Commission to fill the
institutional gap that exists with regards to assisting countries to make the transition from war
to lasting peace.’ In September 2005, during the UN world summit and the 60th session of
the General Assembly, the recommendations of the report were reviewed. Kofi Annan noted
“Our record of success in mediating and implementing peace agreements is sadly blemished
by some devastating failures. Indeed, several of the most violent and tragic episodes of the
1990s occurred after the negotiation of peace agreements … if we are going to prevent
conflict we must ensure that peace agreements are implemented in a sustained and
sustainable manner.”

Role of Military
The role of military in the post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation has been an
acknowledged factor. In that context, it has been noted that the ‘use of military force in the
aftermath of a conflict to underpin rapid and fundamental societal transformation …
[including] comprehensive efforts … aimed to engineer major social, political, and economic
reconstruction’.

The military is an important tool for post-conflict re-construction and rehabilitation in at least
three areas: (a) Establishing a secure and safe environment for the people at large and for the
development agencies to commence their activities, (b) restoring essential services to an
acceptable standard, and (c) creating stable conditions for development and economic
growth.

The militaries are also critical for security sector reforms in the post-conflict re-construction
and rehabilitation environment. Their role can be envisaged in both defensive and offensive
domains. The military is trained and equipped to address contingencies arising from chaos,
lawlessness, reappearance of violence, human rights violations, untrustworthiness and
mutiny.

The military is also crucial for disarming violent groups and their demobilisation, recovery of
arms from the public, quelling violence and emergency stabilisation, and preventing relapses
into anarchy. At another level, the military should prepare and train the police forces to take
on the responsibility of post-conflict situations and develop capacities for establishing rule of
law. Its primary aim is to demilitarise the society and ensure civil control.

Several militaries have developed comprehensive strategies and developed capacities to

respond to post-conflict re-construction and rehabilitation and have constituted specialised
units for such purposes. Some militaries are engaged in addressing human security issues in
the post-conflict environment. The UN too is engaged in transforming its capability to
address issues of security, development and democratisation, notably in fragile and post-
conflict states in a comprehensive manner.

Role of Civil Society Organisations and Non-governmental Organisations

The Civil Society Organisations and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are important
stakeholders and have assumed a crucial role in the post-conflict reconstruction and
rehabilitation dynamics. These entities play a pivotal role by setting up and maintaining
essential services, assisting the refugee and internally displaced populations in remote areas.
They help to strengthen societies through their deep understanding of local needs and culture
which acts as a catalyst for fast and effective aid. Further, they fill the gap when political
circumstances prevented multilateral and bilateral activities inside the country.
It is true that any violent conflict results in the polarisation of social relationships that can
have long term devastating effects on societies. The circumstances of uncertainty contribute
to the creation of a long-lasting social mistrust. It is this reason that the communication
bridges must be restored among the social groups and encourages participation in political
life for social reconciliation. The civil society must contribute to resolving differences of
interests of the different groups over the long-term. However it is important that the actors of
the civil society drive the mechanisms that are critical for strengthening peace and
reconciliation within the communities and avoid supporting the forces that were responsible
for the war.

Civil societies can also help manage the tensions in the community by influencing the
political leaders and creating unofficial mechanisms for the resolution of disputes. Traditional
institutions and mechanisms for peace-building such as advice from elders or religious
leaders can play a significant role in peace-building and reconciliation processes thereby
creating a connection of trust with local partners.

In general, the NGO’s and civil society must explain the idea of their work and the processes
they chose to the people who should develop trust in their activities. Also they must have a
network with the society, public authorities and other social sector actors. Their efforts can be
instrumental for improving the quality of people’s lives.

Role of Media
The media has a major role to play in the post-conflict re-construction and rehabilitation
process. Experiences show that media can play a positive role in promoting peace and
reconciliation. However, the flip side is that media can also act as tool that can generate
hatred leading to disintegration. Be that as it may, if democratic social actors have access to
the media it can establish connectivity among all the stakeholders i.e. governments, financial
institutions, civil society and NGOs and provide information about the society, economic and
political structures, and generate social cohesion and enhance social human capital. Therefore
a well-functioning media can help promote democratisation.

As a result, international organisations, bilateral donors and NGOs have begun to explore
opportunities for media as a tool for enhancing their activities. For instance, the UN has
developed a sophisticated strategy to harness the tool of media in almost every UN
intervention and the media’s role in sustaining peace and democratic transitions continues to
increase.

The media can also have a role in terms of social education, addressing many issues of
concern to the target audience, and in the process helping to reduce tensions and build trust
within the society. Important information can be relayed to the populations regarding health,
literacy, the environment; in areas of conflict or post-conflict, this can include information on
landmine awareness, war trauma, the Geneva Conventions or the peace accords and
demobilisation processes, and it may also ensure that each side to a dispute is allowed to hear
the other’s position, thereby opening lines of communication between them. On their part, the
media should train the local staff in reporting on conflicts, to help develop high quality and
accurate overage, establish autonomous national and local media institutions and create a
gene pool of professionals with high ethical standards.

Some of the successful media ventures in the post-conflict and rehabilitation process are (a)
The Center for Conflict Resolution in Uganda conducts workshops for media outlets and
members to examine their roles in peace-building and to develop conflict resolution skills,
including sensitising reporters to traditional African mechanisms of dealing with peace and
reconciliation; (b) Studio Ijambo created by Search for Common Ground to specifically
counter a recurrence in Burundi of genocidal hate radio in Rwanda. (c) Radio Blue Sky
established for the UN in Kosovo as an emergency source of information programmes to
specifically open dialogue and democratic debate in Albanian, Serbian and Turkish
communities and (d) UNTAC Radio to inform the people of Cambodia about the United
Nations Transitional Authority and promoting reconciliation.

Role of Women
The discourse and debate on the role of women in the post-conflict re-construction and
rehabilitation has gathered momentum. It has been noted that ‘women make a contribution to
the rebuilding of countries emerging from armed conflicts. Special attention is given to
women's priority concerns, to their resources and capacities, and to structural and situational
factors that may reduce their participation in reconstruction processes’. Further, ‘the post-war
reconstruction processes influence the reconfiguration of gender roles and positions in the
wake of war, and how women's actions shape the construction of post-war social structures.’

It is an acknowledged fact that women are the primary civilian victims of war; yet they are
generally excluded from the decision-making process. Significantly, they are powerless to
prevent wars and are excluded from the discussions and negotiations when it comes to their
resolution. They are restricted to a secondary and unimportant role in the post-conflict
reconstruction and reconciliation efforts. This is notwithstanding the fact that the United
Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 of October 2000 on women, peace and security
calls upon the member states ‘to ensure increased representation of women at all decision-
making levels in national, regional and international institutions and mechanisms for the
prevention, management and resolution of conflicts.’

Women have a major role to play in all aspects of conflict prevention and post-conflict peace-
building for the establishment of a lasting peace. Women are critical for post-conflict re-
construction and rehabilitation at the grass-roots and community levels and their practical
steps and initiatives should be taken seriously. Further, their role as peace ambassadors has
come to be acknowledged and are a common sight in national, regional and international
meetings concerned with peace and security. Further, they can offer practical suggestions for
women’s socioeconomic rights including employment, property ownership and inheritance
during post-conflict reconstruction.
In Afghanistan, women are being empowered though their engagement in rebuilding the
country. For instance, 2 of the 29 ministries in the government are headed by women; there
are four women deputy ministers, five female generals, and two commissioners on the nine-
member panel drafting the constitution. The Afghanistan government’s National
Development Framework (NDF) acknowledges that national development cannot be realised
without the participation by women in policies and resource allocation and also without
specific programmes for women. Even international financial institutions such as the Asian
Development Bank encourage the role of women in post-conflict reconstruction and
rehabilitation. It is agreed that special attention must be paid to gender, and not include it as
an afterthought.

15.4 POST-CONFLICT FUND AND THE ROLE OF WORLD BANK, ASIAN

DEVELOPMENT BANK (ADB) AND AFRICA DEVELOPMENT BANK
(AfDB)
States engaged in war divert substantial resources from productive activities to acquiring
destructive tools. This diversion of resources to the war effort often results in decrease in
other public expenditures for infrastructure, health and education. During the war, the
opposing forces often target physical infrastructure such as telecommunications, airports,
ports, roads and bridges. They also destroy housing, schools and health facilities. Post-
conflict reconstruction therefore involves the repair and reconstruction of physical and
economic infrastructure and rebuilding weakened institutions. Funds for the post-conflict
reconstruction activities can be broadly divided as one requiring funds for relief and the other
for the long-term development. The immediate post-conflict situation requires large amounts
of aid to a conflict-ridden country on an urgent basis and the long term development funds
can be made available over a period of time.

At the end of World War II, The World Bank was established for reconstruction and
development activities in its member countries and since then it has been in the forefront of
post-conflict reconstruction. In the initial stages, it concentrated on providing financial capital
and rebuilding physical infrastructure through country assistance programmes. The increase
in intrastate and regional conflicts in the 1980s and early 1990s highlighted the need for the
Bank to rethink its role and shift away from providing physical capital to rehabilitating social
capital and institutions of conflict-affected countries.

With its successful track record in the post-conflict reconstruction and development activities,
in July 1997, the Executive Board of the World Bank decided to constitute and establish the
Post-Conflict Fund (PCF) ‘to increase knowledge and improve available instruments within
the Bank tenable early engagement and ensure an appropriate role for the Bank in the crucial
transition from relief to rehabilitation, and reconstruction activities.’ The programme
envisages ‘constructive engagement in conflict-affected countries where normal instruments
and budget provisions cannot apply.’
In 2009, the Post-Conflict Fund (PCF) was superseded by the State and Peace-Building Fund
(SPF) and the Low Income Countries under Stress (LICUS) Implementation Trust Fund. The
SPF also serves as an entry point to countries that have had limited or no involvement with
the World Bank, or piloting an approach that is later scaled up with IDA funding. The SPF
allows the Bank to evaluate the programme performance in the concerned country, region, or
theme and offers strategic direction for effective implementation of the programme. It is
planned to make available about $100 million for the SPF over the three-years of FY09 to
FY11 with three equal installments of $33.3 million. Since 2009, 28 grants, of which 22 have
been signed with the recipients and 11 are effective and commenced disbursing.

Like the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has been actively engaged in the
post-conflict reconstruction activities in the Asian countries. For instance, the ADB began
post-conflict reengagement in Afghanistan with a disaster and emergency relief programme
in Afghanistan. The 2004 Performance-Based Allocation (PBA) Policy provided a
framework for ADF allocations to post-conflict countries. In the case of Afghanistan, ADB
set aside $400 million during two biennial periods, 2005–2006 and 2007–2008.

The African Development Bank (AfDB) programme of assistance to fragile countries aims to
support socio-economic development and fighting poverty in its Regional Member Countries
(RMCs). The bank has recognised the huge challenges faced by post-conflict countries and
fragile states and the criticality of providing basic services and restart economic activity. The
Bank’s point of entry into a country’s post-conflict reconstruction and development effort
begins after the cessation of hostilities and the establishment of a transitional government
authority supported by stakeholders within the country and the international community.

15.5 CASE STUDY: RECONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION OF THE

TAMILS IN SRI LANKA
The twenty five year old civil war in Sri Lanka that has claimed nearly 70,000 civilian lives
came to end in 2009. The United Nations estimated that over 7,000 people were killed and
about 300,000 people displaced in the final phase of the war. By early 2010, about two thirds
of the displaced population had returned to their homelands and communities and were
confronted with total destruction of the infrastructure including their homes.

The genesis of the civil war lies in the discrimination meted out to the minority Tamil
community who, during the course of the civil war, wanted complete autonomy for Tamil-
dominated areas under their control in the north and the east of the country as part of the
devolution of powers at the Provincial level. Over the years, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil
Eelam (LTTE) had developed extensive military capability and had challenged the Sri
Lankan government forces with great success.

However, with the civil war over, the Sri Lankan government is faced with major challenges
to ensure that the conditions are conducive for more than 2,50,000 internally displaced people
(IDP) who now wish to return to their homes. The northern and eastern part of Sri Lanka
require reconstruction of infrastructure such as roads, hospitals, houses, churches, temples,
schools, etc.

The Sri Lankan President Rajapaksha has made several assurances and commitments and
noted that “there are still some aspects of security of the IDPs that had to be taken care of in
view of the likely presence of LTTE infiltrators among the IDPs, who had come to the
Government controlled areas. When conditions improve, especially with regard to security,
there would be no objection to such assistance from organisations that are genuinely
interested in the well being of the IDPs and the needs of rehabilitation and reconstruction. He
said that there is a plan to resettle most of the IDPs within 180 days, under internationally
accepted norms.”

Further, the UN Secretary General appealed to the international community to assist Sri
Lanka in its Common Humanitarian Action Plan (CHAP) jointly launched by the Sri Lankan
Government and the UN, to support the relief, shelter and humanitarian needs of those in the
IDP sites. The Sri Lankan President has also undertaken demilitarisation, rehabilitation and
re-integration of ex-combatants into civilian life with the assistance of the UN and other
international organisations. It has also been acknowledged that reconciliation is critical for
promoting peace though it is a long drawn process. Further, having won the war, it is
important for the government to win the hearts and minds of the Sri Lankan Tamils that
would the pave the way for reconciliation and peace.

Several NGOs are engaged in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the IDP. For instance,
the North-East Rehabilitation and Development Organisation (NERDO) is playing a key role
in the rehabilitation, reconstruction and resettlement processes and is engaged in various
activities in support of the Tamil speaking people. Similarly, the Sarvodaya Shramadana
Movement, the largest community based organisation in Sri Lanka has been actively engaged
in supporting people displaced by the war. In 2008, it began coordinating relief programmes
in the north and east of the country and provided services in 23 IDP camps. It provided
Sarvodaya’s water, sanitation and medical services and over 200,000 people benefitted from
their services. It provided a mobile library for children and also offered legal services to help
families obtain birth certificates and other legal documents. The Community Health Unit took
care of malnourished children with a high-energy diet and brought them to normal health.
Overall, people benefited from the Sarvodaya’s assistance.

Likewise there has been a call on the media to play a positive role in reconstruction and
rehabilitation of the IDP and also strengthen the ongoing reconciliation efforts. Negative
reporting should be avoided and the focus should be on development and peace building
efforts such as rebuilding, swift resettlement of the IDP and rehabilitation of the former
combatants.

The Tamil community women living in the conflict ridden areas had witnessed violence and
brutality and there have been reports of them being killed, injured, raped, tortured, trafficked,
harassed and physically and sexually assaulted. They are now taking on the responsibility for
their families’ economic and emotional survival, taking on new roles to enhance family
income in the face of economic hardship.

15.6 SUMMARY
Post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation is a critical step in the longer-term
development process. Its success is based on a number of factors such as the political will, the
legitimacy of the state, support from international organisations, financial institutions, and
other non-state actors such as the civil society, NGOs and the media. These institutions
should identify the gaps and constraints of capacity in their strategies for post-conflict
reconstruction and rehabilitation. They also need to undertake sound political analysis and
international responses should be adapted to country and regional contexts.

15.7 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

1. Define post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation. Who, in your view, are the
important stakeholders for post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation of war-torn
societies?
2. What is the role of the State in post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation?
3. Is the UN most suitable stakeholder to undertake post-conflict reconstruction and
rehabilitation of war-torn societies? If so, why?
4. Are international financial institutions equipped to support post-conflict
reconstruction and rehabilitation of states? If so, how?
5. It has been argued that ‘women make a contribution to the rebuilding of countries
emerging from armed conflicts’. Examine the statement at length.
6. Highlight the role of media in post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation of states.
7. Explain the role of NGOs in the post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts
of Sri Lanka.

SUGGESTED READINGS
Birgitte Sørensen, “Women and Post-Conflict Reconstruction: Issues and Sources”, available
at
http://www.unrisd.org/unrisd/website/document.nsf/(httpPublications)/631060B93EC1119E
C1256D120043E600?OpenDocument

Caroline Bahnson, and Jozefina Cutura. , “ The Post-conflict Fund, Addressing Challenges of
Globalization: An Independent Evaluation of the World Bank’s Approach to Global
Programs” The World Bank , Washington, 2005, 2004.

John J. Hamre, and Gordon R. Sullivan., Toward Postconflict Reconstruction, The

Washington Quarterly, Autumn 2002, 25:4 .

“Progress Report: State And Peace-Building Fund, With Licus And Pcf Trust Funds”,
Operations Policy and Country Services May 17, 2010, available at http://www-
ds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2010/05/26/000333037_20
100526005802/Rendered/PDF/546780BR0R2010101Official0Use0Only1.pdf

See Michael Lund, ‘A Toolbox for Responding to Conflict and Building Peace’, in L.
Reychler and T. Paffenholz., (eds.), Peacebuilding: A Field Guide, Lynne Rienner
Publishers, Boulder, Colorado, 2001.

Peter Wallensteen., Understanding Conflict Resolution: War, Peace and the Global System,
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California, 2002.

Tim Murithi, “Towards a Symbiotic Partnership: The UN Peacebuilding Commission and

The Evolving African Union/NEPAD Post-Conflict Reconstruction Framework”, in Adekeye
Adebajo and Helen Scanlon., (eds.), A Dialogue of the Deaf: Essays on Africa and the United
Nations, Jacana, Johannesbur, 2006.

Junne, G, and Verkoren, W., (eds), Postconflict development: meeting new challenges, Lynne
Rienner, Boulder CO, 2005.

Hakena, HP, Ninnes, P and Jenkins, B., (eds), NGOs and Post-Conflict Recovery, Asia
Pacific Press ANU Canberra, 2006 .

Collier, P. and A. Hoeffler., "Aid, policy and growth in post-conflict societies", European
Economic Review, vol. 48, 2004, pp.1125-1145.

Kamphuis, B., ‘Economic Policy for Building Peace’, in G Junne and W Verkoren (eds),
Post-Conflict Development: Meeting new challenges, Lynne Rienner, Boulder, 2005, pp.
185-210.

Ottaway, M, ‘Rebuilding State Institutions in Collapsed States’, Development and Change,

vol. 32, no. 5, 2002, pp. 1001-1023.
UNIT 16 CASE STUDIES: AFGHANISTAN

Structure

16.1 Introduction
Aims and Objectives
16.2 From Conflict to Reconstruction
16.3 International Community and Reconstruction
16.4 Work in Progress
16.4.1 Signs of Economic Revival
16.4.2 Difficult Security Situation
16.4.3 Control of Opium Cultivation
16.5 India’s Role in Reconstruction
16.5 1 Infrastructure Projects
16.5.2 Humanitarian Assistance
16.5.3 Education and Capacity Building
16.5.4 Positive Impact
16.6 Importance of Afghanistan for India and the Region
16.7 Summary
16.8 Terminal Questions
Suggested Readings

16.1 INTRODUCTION
In the last three decades, Afghanistan has witnessed diverse projects of nation building
and socio-political transformation. The Soviet project of building communism in
Afghanistan resulted in over a million dead and five million Afghan refugees, mainly in
the neighbourhood. Similarly, when Pakistan pushed conservative Taliban regime in
Afghanistan, the world faced disastrous consequences, including the 9/11 terrorist attacks
in the United States (US). The current international project of building democracy and
market economy is mandated by the United Nations and is being implemented mainly by
the western alliance led by the United States. So far, this endeavour has produced mixed
results. Apart from installing a democratic government, the country has made significant
achievements in infrastructure, education, women empowerment and the economy. After
reaching record levels in 2007, opium cultivation and production have somewhat
moderated in the last two years. Despite significant success in many areas, however, the
Taliban insurgency is gaining strength in many parts of the country and the security
situation has deteriorated. There is also an alarming rise in suicide bombings. Most
analysts believe that there is a need to rethink the present strategy. Within six months of
announcing a comprehensive new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan (commonly
known as Af-Pak strategy) in which the new US President Barack Obama aimed “to
disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their
return to either country in the future,” he had made many changes in his strategy. The
new Afghanistan-Pakistan Regional Stabilization Strategy outlined by the US State
department in January 2010 focuses on reintegration, expanded civilian presence and
regional diplomacy. At the London Conference (January 2010) participants “re-affirmed
the goals of greater Afghan leadership, increased regional cooperation and more effective
international partnership”. To end the stalemate, the option of reconciliation with the
Taliban is also being considered seriously.
Aims and Objectives
After studying this Unit, you would be able to:
· Understand the background of conflict in Afghanistan;
· Describe the nature of the current nation building project and involvement of
major powers;
· Comprehend major problems concerning security and narcotics;
· Appreciate India’s role in Afghan reconstruction; and
· Evaluate major challenges facing the country.

16.2 FROM CONFLICT TO RECONSTRUCTION

Ahmad Shah Durrani founded Afghanistan in 1747. The country served as a buffer in
“The Great Game” between the British and the Russian empires in the late 19th century.
Following the third Ango-Afghan war, the country regained independence from the
notional British control. Beginning from 1933, King Zahir Shah ruled the country till
1973 when he was overthrown in a bloodless coup. The Soviet Union invaded in 1979 to
support Afghan communist regime. As part of the Cold War strategy, the United States
started funding various factions of anti-communist Mujahideens, who all shared
conservative Islamic ideology. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia provided further logistic and
financial support to these groups.
After the Soviet withdrawal in early 1989, the Nazibullah regime was able to last a few
more years till 1992. In 1992, different Mujahideen groups established the Islamic
Republic of Afghanistan with the introduction of rotating presidency. Between 1992 and
1996 Afghanistan saw one of the worst periods in its history. Different parts of the
country were controlled by different warlords. During this period, much of the
infrastructure in Afghanistan was destroyed. In this chaotic situation, a new Taliban
movement emerged in the south, seizing control, first of Kandahar and surrounded areas
and later Kabul in 1996. The Taliban had strong backing from the Inter Services
Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s intelligence agency, which assisted in recruitment, provided
weapons, training and technical assistance. In the beginning Taliban were well received
and quickly they established new political and social order in the country. The world was
horrified when it learned the way Taliban were treating the women and minorities. In
2001, they also destroyed sixth century monumental statues of standing Buddha at
Bamiyan because they declared that statues were against the tenets of Islam. However,
Afghanistan was still a forgotten place for most Western countries as their larger strategic
objective of defeating Soviets was achieved. Still, some of the regional countries (India,
Iran, Russia, Tajikistan) were helping the Northern Alliance which was fighting the
Taliban regime in Afghanistan. These regional countries had better understanding of the
dangers of Taliban than many western capitals. The US became active only when
Taliban’s links to Osama Bin Laden became clear. Finally, when September 11 attacks
happened President Bush delivered an ultimatum to Taliban to extradite Osama. Later, at
a press conference in Pakistan, the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan asked proof and
refused to extradite Osama to the US. Consequently, on October 7, 2001, Operation
Enduring Freedom was launched with the initial objectives of (a) destruction of terrorist
training camps and infrastructure within Afghanistan; (b) capturing of Al Qaeda leaders;
and (c) cessation of terrorist activities in Afghanistan. Initially, the U.S. and the U.K. led
the aerial bombing campaign, with ground forces supplied primarily by the Northern
Alliance. In 2002, the US, British and Canadian infantry were joined by some special
forces, from other allied nations.
After the fall of the Taliban, all the Afghan factions who were opposed to Taliban met in
Bonn in December 2001. The meeting was sponsored by the United Nations. Decades of
war, followed by the Taliban regime, had already destroyed the core institutions of
Afghan state. The heavily war torn economy faced high levels of absolute poverty, ill
health, large scale illiteracy and complete marginalisation of the female population. In
addition, millions of Afghans had left the country and became refugees mainly in the
neighbouring countries. The Bonn Agreement charted the roadmap for the political
transformation of the county into a democratic state. The UN Security Council endorsed
the agreement through its resolution 1383. Under the leadership of Hamid Karzai, a
Transitional Administration was established to guide the process of transformation. The
interim administration derived its authority through the Loya Jirgha (Grand Council)
convened by former Afghan king Zahir Shah. In early 2002, international donors
gathered in Tokyo and pledged about $4.5 billion for the reconstruction efforts in
Afghanistan. In March 2002, the UN also established the UN Assistance Mission in
Afghanistan (UNAMA). The constitutional Loya Jirgha adopted a new constitution in
January 2004, with the presidential form of government. In April 2004 in Berlin, 23
donor nations pledged a total of $8.2 bn. aid to Afghanistan over three years. Under the
new constitution, presidential elections were held in October 2004 and parliamentary
elections in September 2005. More than 75 per cent voters participated in the
presidential election and a significant number of women to the National Assembly were
elected. The constitution also established legal protection for the private property and it
was presumed that economic development in the country will be based mainly on the
market economy. These were remarkable achievements for a country destroyed by
decades of war. Once these landmarks were achieved, the international community and
the Afghanistan government agreed on the Afghanistan Compact at the London
Conference in 2005. The compact set ambitious targets for security, governance,
development, regional cooperation and counter narcotics. While reviewing the
Afghanistan Compact, at another international conference on Afghanistan in Paris in June
2008, the international community made further commitments for the next five years.
Despite serious difficulties, the process of second presidential elections was completed in
2009.
16.3 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY AND RECONSTRUCTION
More than 70 nations have committed over US$ 57 billion for Afghan reconstruction. As
of February 2009, the United States had pledged US$ 38.6 billion, out of which $ 22
billion had already been disbursed. More than 50 per cent of this aid has gone into
building Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police. Other commitments are in
the areas of economic and social development, governance, counter narcotics and support
to many civil society activities. Apart from this, the number of US troops serving in
Afghanistan could touch 100,000 in 2010.

The next major commitment to Afghanistan is from Europe. Individual Member States of
the European Union (EU) and the European Commission are making significant
contribution to security and justice reforms, development and reconstruction, counter
narcotics and regional cooperation activities in Afghanistan. The EU has also deployed a
police mission. Together they have committed around EUR 8 billion (around $11.5 bn)
for reconstruction activities. Besides, 25 out of 27 EU nations are participating in NATO-
led ISAF mission with around 30,000 troops. Their military involvement in Afghanistan
has been controversial at times because of limits of their deployment and “national
caveats” on many of their troops. Many EU nations committed themselves thinking that it
would mainly be a peacekeeping and reconstruction effort rather than a project of “war
on terror’ in which they have to engage with the resurgent Taliban. There have also been
problems of coordination with other international partners as well as within the EU
nations themselves. On reconstruction, the UK has spent over 740 million pounds
(around $1175 million) in the last eight years and have committed to more than 510
million ($810 mn) over the next four years. Germany has also increased its funding in
2008-09 and by 2010, it is likely to have made available resources worth some EUR 1.2
billion ($1.72 bn). From Asia, Japan has pledged around $1.8 bn. to Afghanistan
including reconstruction ($ 919 mn.), security involvement ($212 mn.) and governance
($ 247 mn.). Together with the UN, Japan is a lead nation in Disarmament,
Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR) and also involved in construction of Kabul-
Kandahar highway and Kabul international airport terminal. After the collapse of the
Taliban, Chinese authorities showed relatively little interest in Afghanistan’s
reconstruction. According to the Chinese government sources, China has provided more
than 900 million yuan ($US 132 million) grants to Afghanistan. It remained disengaged
in the country until Afghan administration opened its energy, mineral and raw material to
foreign investors. With large investment commitment of about $ 3 billion in copper mines,
it is becoming clear that China will be more involved in Afghanistan than hitherto.

16.4 WORK IN PROGRESS

16.4.1 Signs of Economic Revival
According to the Afghanistan National Development Strategy (ANDS) more than 5
million Afghan refugees have returned home since 2002. The number of school going
children has grown from under one million in 2001 to about 6 million in 2008 ( one third
of them are girls). The number of teachers has increased seven fold to 142,500, which
include 40,000 female teachers. In the health and nutrition sector, more than US$1 billion
has been invested in the last five years. As a result, the percentage of people living in
areas where basic health care facilities are made available has increased from 9 per cent
in 2002 to 85 percent in 2008. The infant mortality rate has been reduced by 26 per cent
in five years. 76 per cent of children under the age of five have been immunised against
childhood diseases. Between 2002 and 2008, there has been 38 per cent reduction in child
mortality and 40 per cent in maternal mortality. As a result, the lives of approximately
500,000 children have been saved since 2003.

It is remarkable that despite a difficult legacy, the macroeconomic stability in

Afghanistan has been maintained with high growth rates. Till 2007, inflation remained
reasonably low and exchange rate has been stable. More than a dozen private
commercial banks, four private airlines and 13 microfinance institutions are operating
successfully. About 150 cities across Afghanistan now have access to mobile phone
networks and internet provider services. Many multinationals which include Coca Cola,
Siemens, Nestle and Etisalat are already in Afghanistan. Today over 12 million Afghans
have access to telecommunication services, compared to 20,000 in 2001. The process of
constructing a 3,200-kilometer optical-fiber network connecting major provincial capitals
with one another and also with neighbouring countries is almost complete. Broadly free
and privately owned media sector has developed. Presently Afghanistan has seven
national TV stations (out of which six are private), numerous radio networks, plus a
diverse and increasingly professional print media. According to government sources
about 12,000 kilometres of roads have been rehabilitated, improved, or built. This
includes the 2200 km long ring road which connects all major town of Afghanistan,
national highways, provincial roads and rural roads. A sum of more than US$ 2 billion
has been spent on roads. All these projects are implemented in difficult security situations.

16.4.2 Difficult Security Situation

The Bonn Conference in 2001 also created International Security Assistance Force (ISAF)
to help the interim administration of Hamid Karzai. In August 2003, the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO) assumed leadership of the ISAF operations. Its initial
mandate was limited to providing security in and around Kabul. Later, the United Nations
extended ISAF’s mandate to cover the whole of Afghanistan. Its main role is to assist the
Afghan government in the establishment of a secure and stable environment. Through its
Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs), the ISAF is also supporting reconstruction and
development. By March 2010, 44 nations had contributed about 90,000 troops to the
ISAF and 26 PRTs were working throughout Afghanistan. The notable troop contributing
nations to the ISAF are US (50,590), UK (9,500), Germany (4,335), France (3,750),
Canada (2,830), Italy (3,160) and Poland (2,140). Under ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’
25,000 more US troops also operate independently. It has also been agreed to raise the
Afghan National Army (ANA) and Afghan National Police (ANP) personnel from their
March 2010 levels of about 104,000 and 97,000 respectively to 171,600 and 134,000 by
October 2011.

After initial successes till 2004-05, the security situation in Afghanistan has become more
difficult, complex and challenging. One of the main reasons has been deteriorating
security situation, particularly in the south and east of the country. A major change
which has happened in the last three years is the rise in the number of suicide bombings
which reached almost 150 in 2007 and continued in 2008 and 2009. The coalition
casualties in Afghanistan are growing with every passing year making 2009 (with 520
casualties) the bloodiest year since 2001. By March 2010, the coalition force had suffered
a total of 1733 casualties. Since 2001, the US has suffered the maximum casualties
(1047), followed by UK (281), Canada (142), Germany (42), and France (41). In addition,
thousands of Afghan National Army, Afghan Police, ordinary civilians and anti-
government insurgents have also lost their lives.

16.4.3 Control of Opium Cultivation

The opium production continues to be a serious problem in Afghanistan although 2008
and 2009 opium surveys by the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC)
have shown that there has been some moderate decline. In 2008 it was shown that 98 per
cent of the total cultivation was confined to seven provinces with serious security
problems. Five out of these provinces were in the south and two in the west of
Afghanistan. The seven provinces that contributed to 98 per cent of Afghan opium
cultivation and production in 2008 were Hilmand, Kandahar, Uruzgan, Daykundi, Zabul,
Farah and Nimroz, clearly showing strong linkages between opium production and
security situation. Opium cultivation in Afghanistan has decreased by 22%, from 157,000
hectares (ha) in 2008 to 123,000 ha in 2009. In 2008, Hilmand remained the single largest
opium cultivating province where 66 per cent of total Afghan cultivation was done. In
2009 the cultivation declined by a third, to less than 70,000 ha. in Hilmand. The 2009
survey also shows that compared to 13 in 2007 and 18 in 2008, 20 provinces (out of 34)
were poppy free. All the seven provinces in the Northern region are poppy free in almost
a decade. The UNODC survey rightly asserts that “controlling drugs in Afghanistan will
not solve all of the country’s problems, but the country’s problems cannot be solved
without controlling drugs”. It has been clearly shown by many studies that drug money
has significantly contributed to corruption and poppy money is used by the Taliban to
fund insurgency.

16.5 INDIA’S ROLE IN RECONSTRUCTION

With broad understanding that peaceful and stable Afghanistan is crucial for regional
stability, India has been playing an active role in the reconstruction since 2002. So far it
has pledged assistance worth about $1.3 billion, with projects covering the whole of
country mainly in the areas of road construction, power transmission lines, hydro
electricity, agriculture, telecommunication, education, health and capacity building.
Details of these projects can be classified under four major heads:

16.5.1 Infrastructure Projects

One of the major infrastructural projects completed by India is construction of 218 km
Zaranj-Delaram road project in the southwestern Afghanistan. This road has a strategic
significance for India as it is going to facilitate movement of goods and services from
Afghanistan to the Iranian border and, onward, to the Chahbahar Port. This road, together
with 60 km of inner-city roads in Zaranj and Gurguri, was completed in January 2009 at a
cost of US $150 million. During construction 6 Indians and 179 Afghans lost their lives
due to insurgent attacks. Another major project, which was completed in 2009 was
construction of 220kV DC transmission line from Pul-e-Khumri to Kabul and a
220/110/20 kV sub-station at Chimtala. Built at the cost of $120 million, this line has
facilitated almost 24 hour power supply from the northern grid to Kabul city. Further,
Indian engineers will also be setting up of additional 220/20 kV sub stations at Charikar
and Doshi along the Pule-e-khumri Kabul transmission line. With the Indian help,
construction and commissioning of $ 184 million, 42 MW Salma Dam power project on
Hari Rud river in Herat province is also going to be completed by the end of 2010. At the
cost of $180 million, the Indian government is also going to construct Afghan Parliament
building by 2011. It has also restored telecommunication infrastructure in 11 provinces
and expanded national TV network by providing an uplink from Kabul and downlinks in
all 34 provincial capitals. Earlier, it also supplied vehicles (400 buses and 200 mini-buses
for mass urban transportation, 105 utility vehicles for municipalities) and 3 airbus
aircrafts and spares to Ariana Afghan Airlines. The Indian government also supplied
equipment for three sub stations in Faryab province and for 125 km transmission line
from Andhkhoi to Maimana plus rehabilitated Amir Ghazi and Quargah Reservoir Dam.
It further helped in restoration/revamping of information set up, including setting up of
Azadi (Freedom) printing press. Other infrastructure projects include solar electrification
of 100 villages; construction of 5000MT cold storage in Kandahar; establishment of
modern TV studio and 1000W TV transmitter in Jalalabad; setting up of a mobile TV
satellite uplink and five TV relay centers in Nangarhar; digging 26 tube wells in 6 north-
west provinces; drilling of 24 deep wells in Herat; planned construction of Radio
television Afghanistan (RTA) building in Jalalabad and leasing of slot on Indian satellite
INSAT3A for RTA telecast since 2004.

16.5.2 Humanitarian Assistance

The Indian government is providing a daily supply of 100 grams of fortified, high-protein
biscuits to nearly 1.2 million children under a School Feeding Program. This Programme
is administered through the World Food Program and will cost $ 460 million when
completed in 2012. It has also reconstructed Indira Gandhi Institute of Child Health in
Kabul and is providing free medical consultation and medicines through 5 Indian Medical
Missions in Kabul, Kandahar, Jalalabad, Herat and Mazar-e-Shrif to over 300,000
patients annually. Apart from supplying blankets, tents, medicines, vegetable seeds etc
during 2002-2004, the Indian government also announced gift of 250,000 metric tonnes
of wheat in 2009.

16.5.3 Education and Capacity Development

India is playing an important role in this field through provision of 675 long-term
university scholarships annually. These fellowships are sponsored by the Indian Council
for Cultural Relations for under-graduate and postgraduate studies in India. In addition,
675 annual slots for short term technical training courses are provided every year since
2006. At the January 2010 London Conference, the Indian External Affairs Minister
announced further 200 graduate and 100 post graduate/Ph.D fellowships for 5 years in the
field of agriculture and related fields. In 2005, the Habibia school in Kabul was
reconstructed by India and about 9000 educational kits to students of this school were
provided. Further, it provided 20,000 school desks to the Ministry of Education and
laboratory equipments and sports goods to schools in Nimroz as well as teacher training
and books to Kandahar and Khost Universities. In cooperation with the UNDP, the Indian
government is also deputing 30 Indian civil servants as coaches and mentors annually
under the Capacity for Afghan Public Administration program since 2007. It has also
provided services of Indian banking experts to Da Afghan Bank and Millie Bank; Indian
English teachers in 5 cities; vocational training to 1000 Afghans (through the
Confederation of Indian Industries); Women’s Vocational Training Centre in Baghe-
Zanana for training of 1000 Afghan women; computer training centres, and established
Hindi and English departments at Nangarhar university. Special training courses have
also been provided to more than Afghan diplomats, dozens of civilian officials, police
officers, teachers, and doctors and paramedics. In addition, the Indian institutions are also
providing training to Afghans in various fields through training programmes organised by
many international agencies independently.

With the help of the Indian government, nearly 100 small development projects in the
areas of agriculture, public health, rural development, education are also under different
stages of implementation in 19 provinces of Afghanistan since 2007. In 2002, India also
contributed $10 million to Afghan government budget and has also been contributing to
the Afghan Reconstruction Trust Fund regularly since 2002. In 2005-06, it also provided
150 trucks, 15 ambulances, 120 jeeps, bullet proof jackets, bullet proof helmets, laser aim
points, mine detectors, winter clothing, medicines etc., to the Afghan National Army. It
also helped setting up of Common Facilities Service Centre and Tool Room at Pule-e-
Charkhi Industrial Park and trained 5000 self help groups in Balakh.

16.5.4 Positive Impact

It seems that the population of Afghanistan has very positive perception of Indian
activities in the country. This fact has been brought out by many opinion polls. In the
latest nationwide survey conducted by the BBC, ABC News and German news agency
ARD in December 2009, 71 per cent of Afghan population had favourable opinion about
India. Corresponding figure for the US, UK and Iran and Germany was 51 per cent, 39
per cent, 40 per cent and 59 per cent respectively. Similarly, 44 per cent Afghans think
that India is playing a neutral role and 36 per cent think it is playing a positive role. India
is also very popular among ordinary Afghans because of Indian films and serials, which
are shown on different TV channels every day.
16.6 IMPORTANCE OF AFGHANISTAN FOR INDIA AND THE REGION
The strategic location of Afghanistan will always be important for India, particularly in
the context of difficult India-Pakistan relations. However, the importance of Afghanistan
for India is much bigger than normally perceived in this narrow context. Once
Afghanistan becomes stable, trade through Pakistan and Afghanistan could also alter
India’s continental trade. By 2015, India’s trade with Europe, CIS plus Iran, Afghanistan
and Pakistan would be in the range of US$ 500 to 600 billion annually (Gulshan
Sachdeva, 2010). Even if 20 % of this trade is conducted through road, US$ 100-120
billion of Indian trade would be passing through Afghanistan and Central Asia. With
improvement in India-Pakistan relations, an important portion of Indian trade
(particularly from the landlocked northern states including Jammu & Kashmir) will be
moving through Pakistan and Afghanistan. With the possibility of this trade passing
through Afghanistan and Central Asia, most of the infrastructural projects in the region
will become economically viable. These linkages will also transform small and medium
industries and agriculture in Central Asia and Afghanistan. For this to happen, first of all
a massive effort is needed to rebuild Afghanistan’s transport network and economy. From
the commitments of international community and multilateral institutions, it seems that
this would happen immediately once Afghanistan becomes relatively stable. The second
major impediment in realising this potential is existing difficult relations between India
and Pakistan. While looking at the regional economic dynamics, it is clear that both India
and Pakistan would be paying huge economic costs for not cooperating in the
Afghanistan. If trade stops in Pakistan, many road and other infrastructural projects will
never become viable because of low volumes. Direct linkages between Central Asia and
India will also give huge boost to all economies in the region, particularly to Afghanistan.

Despite difficult security situation and limited capacities, Afghanistan could emerge as an
important player in regional economic cooperation. All international and regional players
have appreciated its approach towards regional cooperation. This has major implications
for regional peace and stability as well as India’s linkages with the Eurasian region. High
economic growth in both Central and South Asian regions is also pushing policy makers
to work for integration strategies. Policymakers in Afghanistan believe that after decades
of war, now the country has a unique opportunity to realise its potential as a ‘land bridge’
between Central Asia, South Asia and the West Asian region. Increasingly it is pointed
out that with enhanced cooperation, land-locked energy-rich Central Asia could be
connected to energy deficient South Asia. Similarly, Afghanistan could also realise
significant revenue as transit fee and improve its economic activities in the process. So
far Afghanistan has been able to market itself as an important player in regional
cooperation. The country is already playing an important role in various regional
organisations like Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO), South Asia Association
for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation
(CAREC) etc. It has also initiated an institutional mechanism called Regional Economic
Cooperation Conference (RECC) on Afghanistan. The first RECC was held in Kabul in
2005, second in New Delhi in 2006 and third in Islamabad in 2009. Through various
declarations, countries in the region have accepted the centrality of Afghanistan for
economic cooperation.

16.7 SUMMARY
Afghanistan has made significant gains in infrastructure, education, health, economic
development and women empowerment, which need to be consolidated. The current
security situation in the country is serious but not hopeless. The only possible way is to
increase the numbers and capabilities of Afghan security forces, put pressure on anti-
government forces and also continuously work for political solutions. So far, the Indian
involvement is limited to reconstruction work as it regards stable and peaceful
Afghanistan is crucial for regional peace and stability. Despite major challenges,
Afghanistan has the potential to play an important role in facilitating regional integration
for different economies of South, Central and the West Asia. If proposals concerning
regional economic cooperation originating from Afghanistan are implemented by other
countries in the region, this could ultimately improve chances of peace not only between
India and Pakistan but also in the entire Eurasian region. In a typical neo-functionalist
way, success in regional economic cooperation could ultimately lead to cooperation in
the security matters. This would also be useful to create any new institutional economic
and security structure that may be needed for any post-NATO scenario in Afghanistan.
16.8 TERMINAL QUESTIONS

1. What factors do you think are responsible for the continuing conflict in
Afghanistan?
2. Why does peace and stability in Afghanistan is important for India? Also describe
reconstruction activities by India in Afghanistan since 2002.
3. What are the major challenges faced by Afghanistan in the areas of security and
poppy cultivation?
4. Write an essay on reconstruction activities and achievements in Afghanistan since
2002.
5. Do you think Afghanistan can serve as a transit hub for trade, culture and ideas
between different neighbouring regions?

SUGGESTED READINGS

Agreement on Provisional Arrangements in Afghanistan Pending the Re-establishment of

Permanent Government Institutions (Bonn Agreement), available at
http://unama.unmissions.org/Portals/UNAMA/Documents/Bonn-agreement.pdf

Afghanistan Compact, available at

http://unama.unmissions.org/Portals/UNAMA/Documents/AfghanistanCompact-
English.pdf

Afghanistan National Development Strategy: A Strategy for Security, Governance,

Economic Growth, & Poverty Reduction (Kabul: Government of Islamic Republic of
Afghanistan, 2008), available at
http://www.embassyofafghanistan.org/documents/Afghanistan_National_Development_S
trategy_eng.pdf

Remarks by the President (of the United States) on a New Strategy for Afghanistan and
Pakistan, March 27, 2009, available at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-on-a-New-
Strategy-for-Afghanistan-and-Pakistan/ (

Gulshan Sachdeva., Regional Economic Linkages”, in Nirmala Joshi., (Ed),

Reconnecting India and central Asia: Security & Economic Dimensions” (Washington
DC: Central Asia Caucasus Institute, Johns Hopkins University, 2010). Available at
http://www.silkroadstudies.org/new/inside/publications/Joshi.html

Websites :
http://www.isaf.nato.int/
http://unama.unmissions.org/default.aspx?/
http://www.unodc.org/afghanistan/